An Improved Approach of Winter Wheat Yield Estimation by Jointly Assimilating Remotely Sensed Leaf Area Index and Soil Moisture into the WOFOST Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The crop model data assimilation approach has been acknowledged as an effective tool for monitoring crop growth and estimating yield. However, the choice of assimilated variables and the mismatch in scale between remotely sensed observations and crop model-simulated state variables have various effects on the performance of yield estimation. This study aims to examine the accuracy of crop yield estimation through the joint assimilation of leaf area index (LAI) and soil moisture (SM) and to examine the scale effect between remotely sensed data and crop model simulations. To address these issues, we proposed an improved crop data-model assimilation (CDMA) framework, which integrates LAI and SM, as retrieved from remotely sensed data, into the World Food Studies (WOFOST) model using the ensemble Kalman filter (EnKF) approach for winter wheat yield estimation. The results showed that the yield estimation at a 10 m grid size outperformed that at a 500 m grid size, using the same assimilation strategy. Additionally, the winter wheat yield estimation accuracy was higher when using the bivariate data assimilation method (R2 = 0.46, RMSE = 756 kg/ha) compared to the univariate method. In conclusion, our study highlights the advantages of joint assimilating LAI and SM for crop yield estimation and emphasizes the importance of finer spatial resolution in remotely sensed observations for crop yield estimation using the CDMA framework. The proposed approach would help to develop a high-accuracy crop yield monitoring system using optical and SAR retrieved parameters.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".